I think that most good things people do push on differential progress in one way or another, it’s just a different standard for evaluation. Those do stand out as things that contribute particularly to differential progress.
I would guess that on average progress in the social sciences is a net benefit in terms of differential progress, while progress in the hard sciences is a net cost in terms of differential progress. I think the bulk of improvement in institutions comes from people working within organizations trying to help them run better (with the positive developments then propagated through society), and then economists and the social sciences in a distant second.
Some current things that are trying to push on “differential progress”, if I understand you right:
The Good Judgement Project
Political lobbying to promote regulation of biotech & nanotech research, a la CEA’s/FHI’s Global Priorities Project
AI safety research
Animal rights activism (where the emphasis is on values shift/expanding circles)
Does that look right? What else would you add?
(Paul, I think I’ve heard you talk before about trying to improve institutional quality—do you know of anyone you think is doing this well?)
I think that most good things people do push on differential progress in one way or another, it’s just a different standard for evaluation. Those do stand out as things that contribute particularly to differential progress.
I would guess that on average progress in the social sciences is a net benefit in terms of differential progress, while progress in the hard sciences is a net cost in terms of differential progress. I think the bulk of improvement in institutions comes from people working within organizations trying to help them run better (with the positive developments then propagated through society), and then economists and the social sciences in a distant second.